Re: [discussion] With plugins, is hot-deploy necessary?

[Jacopo Cappellato]

My preference is to remove the hot-deploy folder.
As a side note, the name "hot-deploy" has always been misleading because
most of the components actually require a system restart.

Jacopo


On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Wai  wrote:

> This discussion is in reference to...
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9244
> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-td4702922.html
>
> Now that plugins has been implemented, would hot-deploy be necessary?
>
> As I've mentions in OFBIZ-9244, I think keeping hot-deploy would be useful
> for those that are prototyping new components that might or might not be
> open sourced later. My view is that the plugins directory are for open
> sourced or commercial components that could be downloaded from known
> repositories.  Whereas, the hot-deploy directory is for local
> developments/prototypings.  From an in-house developer's view point with
> multiple proprietary components in development, I find that mixing in-house
> and downloadable components confusing. I.e. difficult to locate my own
> components in the midst of all the available downloaded components (there
> are 12 of them).
>
> On the other hand, Jacques Le Roux takes the position that all plugins
> (open
> sourced, commercial, in-house prototypes) should all be located in one
> place.
>
> You opinions are greatly appreciated.
>
> Kind regards,
> Wai
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/discussion-With-plugins-is-hot-deploy-necessary-tp4702976.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Re: [discussion] With plugins, is hot-deploy necessary?

[Scott Gray]

I imagine it would be fairly simple to add another top level folder with
the same functionality as plugins if desired. Easy enough that we don't
have to include it out of the box.

On 5/03/2017 03:42, "Wai"  wrote:

> Either way is fine for me. I'll name my components directories in 'plugins'
> with a specific prefix.
> Thanks
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/discussion-With-plugins-is-hot-deploy-necessary-tp4702976p4702995.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Re: [discussion] With plugins, is hot-deploy necessary?

[Wai]

Either way is fine for me. I'll name my components directories in 'plugins'
with a specific prefix.
Thanks



--
View this message in context: 
http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/discussion-With-plugins-is-hot-deploy-necessary-tp4702976p4702995.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [discussion] With plugins, is hot-deploy necessary?

[Taher Alkhateeb]

I tend to agree with Jacques in this case. The behavior of /plugins is
identical to the behavior of /hot-deploy. You can put your component here
or there without a problem. So given that /plugins achieves more, which is
automatic control of plugins through the plugins API, I think we should
prefer to have only one way of extending OFBiz functionality.

Hence, my recommendation is to delete /hot-deploy and remove the
component-loading logic affected by that.

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Wai  wrote:

> This discussion is in reference to...
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9244
> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/plugin-and-hotdeploy-td4702922.html
>
> Now that plugins has been implemented, would hot-deploy be necessary?
>
> As I've mentions in OFBIZ-9244, I think keeping hot-deploy would be useful
> for those that are prototyping new components that might or might not be
> open sourced later. My view is that the plugins directory are for open
> sourced or commercial components that could be downloaded from known
> repositories.  Whereas, the hot-deploy directory is for local
> developments/prototypings.  From an in-house developer's view point with
> multiple proprietary components in development, I find that mixing in-house
> and downloadable components confusing. I.e. difficult to locate my own
> components in the midst of all the available downloaded components (there
> are 12 of them).
>
> On the other hand, Jacques Le Roux takes the position that all plugins
> (open
> sourced, commercial, in-house prototypes) should all be located in one
> place.
>
> You opinions are greatly appreciated.
>
> Kind regards,
> Wai
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/discussion-With-plugins-is-hot-deploy-necessary-tp4702976.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>